Guide for writing and submitting proposals for RS&TD projects. 30 May 2013 version 7

Transcription

1 Guide for writing and submitting proposals for RS&TD projects 30 May 2013 version 7

2 I. INTRODUCTION... 2 Abbreviations... 2 II. Prior to Submission... 3 WHAT HAS CHANGED concerning call for projects in all scientific domains WHAT IS STILL IN FORCE concerning call for projects in all scientific domains Sugestions based on the experience gained on PREVIOUS CallS... 4 The FCT proposal submission system... 5 What you should do before submitting a proposal... 6 Who may submit proposals... 7 General recommendations... 7 How to write a good proposal... 9 How to direct questions to the FCT... 9 III. Preparation and Submission of the Proposal Identification of the project Institutions Involved Scientific Component Summary (5,000 characters max.) Technical Description Literature Review (6,000 characters Max.) Research Plan and Methods (10,000 characters Max.) Tasks Project Schedule and Management References Previous Publications Research Team Funded projects Other proposals Outcome Indicators Budget Justification of the budget APPENDICES CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IV. Overview, Sealing and Commitments Overview of the proposal Validate and seal the proposal Declarations of commitment V. SCIENTIFIC AREAS AND DOMAINS VI. Timeline From Sumission to Approval

3 I. INTRODUCTION This guide to writing and submitting proposals for R&TD projects is designed to demystify the submission process, to facilitate and guide the proposal writing process and to provide information about the evaluation, notification of the decision and appeal processes. It brings together information scattered through the FCT website, the application form and in the applicable legislation. It is not, however, intended to take the place of the legislation governing the process. It highlights important information that the PI should be aware of. At you will find a list of recent and open calls for R&D project proposals that have been announced. The link for each call brings you to the official announcement of the respective call. The page that displays the official announcement also gives you access to the regulations and the portal for submitting project proposals. Abbreviations FCT Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia Foundation for Science and Technology ERDF European Regional Development Fund PI Principal Investigator PO Proposing Organization MEC Ministério da Educação e Ciência Ministry of Education and Science NUTS Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics POFC Programa Operacional Factores de Competitividade - COMPETE Competitiveness Factors Thematic Operational Programme NSRF - National Strategic Reference Framework 2

4 II. PRIOR TO SUBMISSION WHAT HAS CHANGED CONCERNING CALL FOR PROJECTS IN ALL SCIENTIFIC DOMAINS The call for projects in all scientific domains includes only the typology Exploratory research projects. It will only be allowed the submission of one application by Principal Investigator. The Principal Investigator should hold the PhD degree obtained between the years of 2003 and 2009 (with no exceptions) The Principal Investigator cannot have any active project, funded by FCT, from 01/01/2014, which is also the Principal Investigator WHAT IS STILL IN FORCE CONCERNING CALL FOR PROJECTS IN ALL SCIENTIFIC DOMAINS It shall remain in force the Regulations Governing Access to Funding for Scientific Research and Technological Development Projects 2010 that you should read. It applies to all open calls from August 2, A minimum allocation time of 35% for the PI and for ALL the remaining team members a minimum of 15%, as was already in force. The rule stating that the Acceptance Agreement shall not be made available for signing for any projects recommended for funding that would cause any member of the research team to exceed 100% (FTE) dedication after the beginning of the project still applies. In case of re-submissions of applications submitted in previous calls and not recommended for funding, it must be indicated the reference of the application and a detailed comment to the panel evaluation with a clear indication of the changes introduced in the new proposal. Substantive arguments should be used to objectively direct to the scientific arguments used by the evaluators. Avoid a direct response to the evaluator that, almost certainly, will not be the same who assessed previous applications. Up to three names of evaluators can be given that, according to the criteria for classification of conflicts of interest listed on the FCT Guide for Peer Reviewers, configure a clear conflict of interest concerning the evaluation of the present application. Projects still under review in other calls are not admissible in this call. Multiple proposals of the same project are not admissible in accordance with no. 5 of Article 3 of the Regulations. The application form explicitly requests information concerning situations which may be considered as falling under this rule. 3

5 No applications will be accepted in which the Principal Investigator is in a situation of unjustified noncompliance with the regulatory requirements with respect to submission of scientific reports from previous completed projects. No applications will be accepted in which the Principal Contractor is in a situation of unjustified noncompliance with the regulatory requirements with respect to submission of financial reports or return of unused balances from previous projects with the same Principal Investigator; FCT will consider as invalid the applications whose Declarations of Commitment presents nonconformities (unfilled, by signing, ) or have not been submitted electronically. The curricula vitæ of all members of the research team will be copied at the moment the proposal is sealed to the evaluation area. Therefore, for the purposes of evaluation of the proposal, the state of each curriculum vitæ at the moment the proposal is sealed is what counts, although each researcher can continue to update his/her curriculum vitæ on the management page. SUGESTIONS BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE GAINED ON PREVIOUS CALLS Even though the PI's minimum allocation time is 35%, a larger allocation is important, as it emphasizes a larger commitment of the PI in the project he/she proposes to lead, and will be seen in a positive light by the evaluation panel. Each PI should obtain the agreement for the association of each team member to the project as well as his/her time allocation. Please check timely if all the institutions are available at the base of FCT, remember that you should not delay to fill out the Pre-registration of Institutions form to request that addition. The new institution will be added to the list of choices within two working days after the completion of that form. Many evaluation panels from previous calls referred that the CVs of the PIs and project key-elements were not sufficiently synthetic, making it difficult to find the relevant information. We recommend PIs to heed this comment, in particular to distinguish the most important publications and the most relevant activities in recent years. We also suggest that the PI makes a read and checks all the CVs of the research team, in particular with regard to the core CVs. The field for the Name in Publications should be filled in the FCT-SIG. If you do not use the same name in all your publications, just fill it in with the most frequently or recently used. This information will simplify the search of your publications by the evaluators. It is recommended special attention to the choice of keywords that characterize the application having regard to its importance in the evaluation process and the identification of areas/topics of scientific research in Portugal (see Chapter III of this guide). 4

6 We recommend a careful preparation of the proposal (see the section How to write a good proposal ) to attract the attention of the evaluation panel and to positively answer the high competitiveness of these calls. The FCT decision to open this type of call on a yearly basis increases the submission opportunities but does not decrease the inherent high competitiveness. The evaluation panel comments transmitted to the PIs contains, in general, useful guidelines for the improvement of the proposals. If a proposal is a continuation of previous or ongoing work, this should be clearly stated in the scientific component of the proposal. Many proposals tend to request the maximum allowable funds for each project, established in the Official Announcement, expecting that, even with the possible reductions proposed the evaluation panels, the approved funds are still close to the maximum. Overestimated requested funds not fully justified are detrimental to the project final score. The FCT proposal submission system The Calls for Project Proposals Portal gives you access to the following sections: List of projects Proposal form Project summary Sections of the proposal form Overview of the proposal Validate and seal the proposal Instructions for completing the form News Sample overview of the form Sample Declaration of Commitment The various sections can be accessed from the bar that appears on the left side of the pages. Changes can generally be made to information submitted by clicking on the buttons labeled Change, Cancel, Delete, etc. that appear on the right side of the page. These changes are transmitted to the FCT server by clicking on the buttons labeled Guardar / Save" located at the bottom of the page. This enables you to work on the application form over several sessions until you consider it complete. Once all of the validation tests have been passed, the proposal is sealed, thereby completing the submission process. Not all of the sections are accessible at the same time. They become accessible as you progress through the form, and sections may be hidden at times so as not to overload the interface. During the first few days of the call, some sections may not be available, such as Overview of the proposal" or Validate and seal proposal". Should this occur, FCT will likely be finetuning some of the details in these sections. 5

7 What you should do before submitting a proposal Official Announcement and Regulations Before beginning to prepare your proposal, make sure you are well informed of the rules and requirements of the call to which you are submitting a proposal by reading the documents containing this information. This is for the most part administrative and financial information contained in the Regulations and in the Announcement of Call for Proposals. No information contained in this Guide is intended to take the place of or override any stipulations set forth in the Regulations or the Announcement of the Call for Proposals. The terms of admissibility of proposals for funding of R&TD projects, as well as the rules and requirements to be observed in the different phases of the proposal process and execution of the project, should it be approved, are set forth in: Regulations Governing Access to Funding for Scientific Research and Technological Development Projects , which set forth the general terms under which funding may be granted to support scientific and technological research projects through national funding sources and, when eligible, co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and managed by the Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT). Announcement of Call for Proposals, which sets forth technical stipulations not defined in the regulations or limits the general terms set forth in the regulations. Generally the Announcement of the Call establishes the financial envelope of the call, the maximum amount of funding for each project, the deadlines for submission and the criteria used to evaluate the proposals. If you intend to include individual grant recipients in your proposal once it has been approved, please consult the following: Norms for the Award of Grants in R&D Projects Grant amounts must correspond to the table of fellowship and grant amounts for grants awarded directly by the FCT within Portugal and any other requirements or supplements set forth in the Regulations for Research Grants of the Foundation for Science and Technology. For projects eligible for NSRF co-funding under the Competitive Factors Thematic Operational Programme, the following regulations should also be consulted: Regulations Governing Application of the Support System for Entities in the National Science and Technology System Regulations Governing the ERDF and Cohesion Fund Registering in the Projects Portal The PI must be registered in the FCT CV Portal (FCTSIG Management Information System) in order to submit a proposal. For detailed information on how to register, or how to recover your user name and password if you have lost them or they no longer work, please see the Instructions. 6

8 Application Form and General Recommendations The application form is organized in such a way as to provide the international evaluators with relevant information. Learn about the structure of the application form and the information it asks for before you begin filling it out. As Principal Investigator you will have to gather information from other colleagues and participating organizations, e.g. their public keys. Get this information early on. If you wish to include a recipient institution that is not available at the base of FCT, remember that you should not delay to fill out the Pre-registration of Institutions form to request that addition. The new institution will be added to the list of choices within two working days after the completion of that form. The FCT website has an overview of the proposal form available in pdf format. Read the section on General Recommendations of this chapter, and try to follow these recommendations while you are preparing and submitting your proposal. How to write a good proposal This guide offers suggestions on how to write a good scientific proposal. Before you start, read the subsection How to write a good proposal and the explanations given in each field of the Scientific Component of the application form. Take note of the instructions regarding the desired content and focus for each of the various fields on the form. Who may submit proposals The proposal must be submitted by the Principal Investigator (PI). The conditions that the PI must satisfy are set forth in the Regulations and, when applicable, in the Announcement of Call for Proposals. The recipient entities, i.e. those applying for funding, the role (proposing or participating) each plays in the project and the conditions they must satisfy in order to qualify are set forth in the Regulations and, when applicable, in the Announcement of Call for Proposals. General recommendations The FCT organizes calls for proposals with a broad range of characteristics. Some involve thousands of applicants. This page contains suggestions for candidates submitting proposals in these calls. Probably the best advice we can give any candidate to a major call where proposals are submitted online, such as some of the FCT calls for project proposals, is: plan and complete your proposal process as early as possible. That way you can ensure that in the event it is needed, the FCT can provide you the best possible assistance. Don't find yourself in the situation illustrated in the graph below showing when candidates sealed their applications for the call of projects in Answers to s to support addresses for large calls are only considered until noon of the last day of the call. 7

9 Check out all the sections of the form in advance so you will have an idea of what is being asked for and to give yourself time to gather all the information required for submission (e.g. public keys of colleagues and advisors). Read the instructions for filling out the form given in this guide and on the form itself carefully. Also check the list of FAQs. Many of your questions or doubts will be answered in this information. Do this before contacting the FCT with your questions. The Announcement of Call for Proposals and the Regulations contain important information that you should be familiar with before you begin to submit your project proposal. Read them carefully. Read the News section on the projects portal regularly. Create a document in Notepad or another word processor with the contents that you will later copy and paste into the application form text fields. This way you will be able to fill out the form more quickly and won t run the risk of your session expiring before you are able to save the data. The proposal should not be fully prepared in a word processor and copied to the form only after that. The text should be directly input in the form or, you can copy, paste and save to the form sub-components previously prepared with a word processor. You can always globally visualize the contents of the form, and validate each of its sections thus reducing the errors during project preparation. Do not use quotation marks ( ) to embrace parts of your text. Some types of quotation marks ( ) may determine that the text after them is ignored. Please verify if your saved text corresponds to what you have planned. As you save the data in different fields on the application form, the system will alert you if there are errors; correct the errors as you go along during the proposal writing process. Trying to correct all the errors just before the deadline for submission can be a difficult task or may even disqualify your proposal. The system provides an explanation for each error detected. Read and interpret this message carefully and proceed accordingly. It is much faster to do this than to contact the FCT to report the error messages you get when you have made a mistake completing the form. There is usually a final verification process before sealing the proposal which may detect additional problems. Waiting until the last minute to make corrections can be risky. Do not assume that a form or the rules for submission are the same as they were the last time you submitted a proposal for the same type of call. 8

10 How to write a good proposal This guide provides information on how to write a good R&TD project proposal. This first section gives some general guidelines, which are described in more detail in Section 3 Scientific Component of the application form. Write in such a way as to convince a top expert in your field that your ideas deserve to be funded. At the same time, you must convince someone who is scientifically literate, but may not have specific background in your area. The aim of your proposal is to convince the evaluators that the ideas you are proposing are so important that you should be entrusted with the taxpayers money to develop them. You can also point out the importance of the project in terms of specific national interests should this be the case. While you are writing the proposal, remember that your goal is to convince the evaluators of the merit of the ideas you hope to develop in the project. You will have to prove that your project is worthy of being funded. Remember that the proposal also represents a commitment in terms of time and involvement and cost, not only on your part as principal investigator, but also on the part of the entire team. Be positive and optimistic, but also realistic in terms of your expectations. If your proposal is approved, you must ensure that the team is capable of carrying out the project as described in the proposal. Avoid the temptation to repeat the same text or entire paragraphs in different sections. The evaluators can always go back and read these paragraphs. Word for word repetitions of portions of text will not advance your proposal in the eyes of the evaluators. A careful review of the evaluation criteria listed in the Announcement of Call for Proposals will give you a good idea of how the proposal will be evaluated. Read these criteria carefully and make sure that your proposal addresses each one positively. If you provide the URLs of bibliographic references or other relevant material, make sure that the links remain active for the duration of the evaluation process. You must understand that an inactive link will not be viewed favorably by a dedicated evaluator and will be interpreted as evidence of a lack of commitment to the proposal. Just as in writing good scientific articles, writing a good proposal is an interactive learning process. If your proposal is not successful, don t give up on a good idea persistence is the name of the game. After venting your frustration, carefully read over the evaluations, assimilate the feedback given by the evaluators and try to answer the following questions: Why wasn t the proposal funded? What can we do differently next time? If your proposal is not funded, it will not be for lack of attention on the part of the evaluators, but rather for lack of good ideas or because the proposal did not communicate your ideas adequately, or because execution of your project may not be compatible with the level of funding of the call for proposals in question. How to direct questions to the FCT Information regarding the contents of the proposal form may be requested by at the address provided in the Announcement of Call for Proposals. For questions related to technical aspects of the website, please contact the webmaster by e- mail at webmaster@fct.pt 9

11 III. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF THE PROPOSAL The application form has 10 sections: 1. Identification of the project 2. Institutions involved 3. Scientific component 4. Research team 5. Funded projects 6. Outcome indicators 7. Budget 8. Justification of the budget 9. Appendices 10. Conflicts of Interest All fields must be filled out in English, except where indicated otherwise. In the following subsections of this guide, the content requested in each of the 10 sections of the form, and in particular in Section 3 - Scientific Component is described, and suggestions for writing a good technical/scientific proposal are given. Many of the fields on the form have character limits. Try to be concise. Once you enter the projects portal, you will have the option of editing a proposal that has already been created or registering a new proposal, provided that there are calls for proposals underway. If you choose the latter option, you will have access to all the calls for project proposals that are open on that day. Choose the call an/or the scientific domains to which you would like to submit a proposal. In this phase you will have to fill out: Title of the project (in Portuguese and in English) Main scientific domain choose from among the options available, which depend on the scientific field to which you are applying The content of these three fields can be changed at a later time when you fill out Section 1 - Identification of the project of the application form. Identification of the project When you access this menu for the first time after you have registered your proposal: The reference code for the project is automatically generated. This will be the FCT s unique identification code for the project until all activities are completed. Funding in the amount of 0.00 is being requested. This amount is updated as you fill out the fields in Section 7 - Budget. The main scientific domain and the title (in Portuguese and English) will be filled with the data provided by the PI when the project was created. You can change these from this menu. 10

12 Main scientific domain The main and secondary scientific domains and, if applicable, their sub-domains, must be chosen from among the options available, beginning with the main scientific domain. The main scientific domain and sub-domain, should there be one, will determine which panel will be in charge of the evaluation. The secondary scientific domain is optional. For each call for proposals, a list of domains and sub-domains will be given in the Announcement of the Call in Chapter V of this guide and whenever justifiable (e.g., in the calls in all scientific domains), this list may consulted at 12_EN.pdf Title of the project (in Portuguese and in English) The title should be brief and to the point, and should be understandable to a reader with a general scientific background and suitable for public dissemination. Acronym of the project You can assign an acronym for identification of your project, which should not exceed 15 characters. Keywords (in Portuguese and English) Importance in the evaluation process - must be chosen in order to characterize briefly the scope of the project and assist the FTC in the proper selection of experts that will evaluate it. Importance in the identification of areas/topics of scientific research in Portugal - If the project is related to research in one or more rare diseases, you should indicate as keyword "Rare Disease" followed by the respective Orpha number that identifies the disease and can be found on the website of ORPHANET Project start date Enter in day-month-year format. The date may be changed in projects recommended for funding during the Acceptance Agreement signature phase, in accordance with the rules set forth in the Regulations. Duration in months Check the Regulations for the call and the Announcement of the Call to find out the maximum number of months allowed for the project. 11

13 Institutions Involved This section identifies the institutions involved in the project from an administrative and financial standpoint and a scientific standpoint. The Portuguese Contractor and Participant Organizations, as entities that may receive funds upon the project approval, must have a NIPC (Collective Person Identification Number, Número de Identificação de Pessoa Colectiva in Portuguese). The name under which they apply must be the official designation associated with the referred NIPC. The foreign institutions, which do not have a NIPC, may apply as Participant Organizations even though with a zero requested budget. The application form presents the NIF or NIPC as being 0 (zero). Exceptional situations relative to foreign institutions are stated in nº6, Article 2 of the Regulations. To add an institution, whatever role it plays in the project, click on Add. Then choose the desired institution from the pull-down list of those available. If you begin to write the first few letters of the name of the institution, the choice of institutions will be narrowed. If the institution meets the requirements but is not on the list, you must fill out the Pre-registration of Institutions form to request that addition. The institution will be added to the list of choices within two working days. In this case, you will need to come back to this section of the form to add a new institution to the project. To change or delete an institution, start by clicking on the name of the institution, then click on Change. To save your changes, click on Change / Modify. PO Proposing Organization It should be an incorporated entity, i.e., having a NIPC (Identity Number that uniquely identifies the institution relative to Social Security and Finances). This should be one of the following types of institutions: Institutions of higher education, their institutes and R&D centers; Associated Laboratories; State Laboratories and other public services that carry out R&D activities; Private not-for-profit institutions whose primary object is S&T activities; Other public and private not-for-profit organizations that carry out or participate in scientific research activities; Companies (only in special cases can a company be a Proposing Organization, as set forth in the Announcement of Call for Proposals). The PO must be an institution belonging to the national science and technology system and must be headquartered in Portugal. The PO is the recipient entity that serves as project leader. In addition to coordinating the project, the Proposing Organization is responsible for communicating with the FCT on behalf of all the partners. The PO will receive all payments for the project, after which it will have to transfer the corresponding amounts to partner institutions. 12

14 After sealing the application, the head of the Proposing Organization chosen by the PI will have to sign a Declaration of Commitment which is pre-filled with data input by the PI. Please be sure that you choose the correct Proposing Organization and that you know it requirements (if any) to play the role of Proposing Organization. Errors detected after sealing are very difficult to solve. We suggest that the contents of the Declaration of Commitment are presented to the head of the Proposing Organization quite in advance of sealing. Description of the proposing or participating organization (1,500 characters max.) Brief description of the proposing or participating organization, its objectives, activities and mission, with an emphasis on R&TD activities. Participating organization Incorporated entity, i.e., having a NIPC (Identity Number that uniquely identifies the institution before Social Security and Tax authorities). Any institution that meets the criteria for proposing organization can be a participating organization. The following may also be eligible: Companies, provided that they are integrated into projects in which the Proposing Organization is a public or private not-for-profit R&D institution, or another company that meets special criteria set forth in the Announcement of Call for Proposals; Foreign entities, provided that they are not budgeted, except when indicated otherwise in the Announcement of the Call. After sealing the application, the heads of the Participating Organizations chosen by the PI will have to sign a Declaration of Commitment which is pre-filled with data input by the PI. Please be sure that you choose the correct Participating Organizations and that you know their requirements (if any) to play the role of Participating Organization. Errors detected after sealing are very difficult to solve. We suggest that the contents of the Declaration of Commitment are presented to the head of the Participating Organizations quite in advance of sealing. Principal research unit The research unit that the Principal Investigator is affiliated with. Additional research unit A research unit that another member of the research team is affiliated with. Filling out this field is optional. Together with the information regarding the principal research unit, it serves to inform the evaluators of the R&D units that key members of the research team belong to. The form allows the inclusion of a maximum of three units of additional research. Host institution University, faculty or other organization that plays the role of host institution for the principal research unit under the FCT s Multi-Year Funding Program. You are not required to name the host institutions of other research units (if they exist). 13

15 Scientific Component The Scientific Component of the project is the central nucleus of the proposal and the section that will be subject to the closest scrutiny by the evaluation panel to determine its scientific merit. This section is organized into the following subsections: Summary Technical Description o Literature Review o Research Plan and Methods o Tasks o Project Schedule and Management References Previous Publications The fields in the scientific component should be filled in text format. It is neither simple nor possible to include mathematical formulas, chemical structures, musical scores or other technical communication methods with special typesetting requirements. For this purpose, and to support the text inserted in the fields of Section 3, you may wish to create a PDF file to be uploaded in Section 9. However, you should not limit your presentation to these files, neglecting the text to be included in Section 3. Summary (5,000 characters max.) The summary should be the central point of the argument designed to win the evaluator over to the research ideas proposed and the methods to be used. Unlike a conventional introduction, this should be an analysis that focuses more on the state of the art, the main problems that need to be solved, the knowledge and know-how the group brings to the project, the strategy and methods to be used, the novelty of the project and the expected results. If the summary is too ambitious for the length of time or the human resources and funding requested for the project, this may weigh in on the negative side when the proposal is evaluated. A good summary should be positive and supported by solid references and key observations that will make the proposed work stand out from other research being conducted in the same field. The references cited in this section, as well as any in the other sections of the form, must be included in the subsection References, using the citation scheme chosen by the PI. It should be also fill out a summary that can be used by FCT for the purpose of publicizing the project. This summary may be exactly the same as submitted in the previous field or slightly modified, for confidentiality reasons. The content of this field will always be a decision of the responsibility of the PI. This field should be written in English and Portuguese. NOTICE: If you submit more than one project to the call (refer to the conditions set out in the Announcement of Call for Proposals), make sure that the international evaluation panel has access not only to the entire contents of the project they have been assigned to evaluate, but also to proposals for projects submitted in the same call by the same PI or by other members of the research team, even if these are in other scientific fields. 14

16 Technical Description This subsection should answer the question Why should public funds be spent on this project? Your description should be written in a positive tone and explain in detail what you intend to do in the project, what objectives you hope to achieve and the reasons why these are important. You are expected to describe in detail the problem to be researched, the challenges it poses, and the approaches and methods to be used to achieve the objectives. You must also convince the evaluators that the PI and the research team are capable of achieving these objectives. You should show that the proposed methodologies are appropriate for achieving the objectives. Specific details are required. General statements of objectives that are not properly substantiated or ideas not shown to be new ideas of the PI and his/her team are neither useful nor sufficient. The PI s goal is to convince the evaluation panel that he/she has the potential to contribute to progress and not just to the status quo". This subsection is not only technical - it should also address organizational considerations. It should show that the PI has a well conceived plan to achieve the objectives (including, if needed, alternative methodologies if the proposed methods prove to be unfruitful), that he/she knows how to predict results, that the temporal planning and management are adequate and that resources are well distributed. It should contain a brief description of how the PI proposes to organize the work into various tasks, the interaction between the various tasks, the role of each participant and what each of the research groups involved will do, the schedule, and a set of milestones with which to judge how the work is progressing. This subsection is organized in four parts: Critical Review of the Literature - here you make the team s previous work known, you show your knowledge of the state of the art and you explain the innovative nature of your proposal; Research Plan and Methods - here you describe, in detail, the research plan you intend to carry out, the methodologies to be adopted, the expected results and how the activities will be divided into tasks; Tasks - here you describe, in detail, the methods to be used and expected results for each of the tasks in the plan of work, along with the resources needed, the duration of each task and the roles of the various participants; Project Scheduling and Management - here you describe the management of the project, how team members will be coordinated and the planned reports. LITERATURE REVIEW (6,000 CHARACTERS MAX.) The goal of this section is to describe the group s previous work and the methodologies that compete with those proposed in this project, and to justify the need for the proposed innovation. The literature review should be critical. Simply referring to previous work without commenting of the contribution the work makes to the approach proposed in your project or without mentioning its limitations is neither significant nor useful. Previous results of the PI and the research team are viewed favorably. The evaluators look at this section to evaluate the vision and the knowledge that the PI has regarding the state of the art and the reasons why the PI believes that the methodologies proposed will perform the best. The PI must convince the evaluators that he/she and the research team have the background needed and understand the open problems in the field of research in which the proposal falls. 15

17 The references cited in this section, as well as those in other sections of the proposal, must be fully identified in the References section, using a method of cross-referencing chosen by the PI. RESEARCH PLAN AND METHODS (10,000 CHARACTERS MAX.) Based on the critical review of the literature presented above, describe the proposed research plan and methods to be used, focusing on the following questions: What is the problem to be investigated; what are its challenges and what is the great idea that the PI and his/her team have to overcome them? Why is the problem important and interesting? What points of view and methods are to be adopted? How will the project advance the state of the art, and what are the new basic ideas that will enable the team to reach their goal? What important ideas do the PI and his/her team have for achieving these ends? What results can be expected from the project? What is the nature of the collaboration between the various partners and what role is played by each one? In this component, the PI should present an overview of the methodologies to be adopted, which will be elaborated on in detail for each task in the following subsection. Please also notice the following that in this field you must justify the innovative character of the idea and the respective scientific potential of the Exploratory research project. TASKS For each task into which the project s activities are organized, the following information should be provided: Task denomination Task denominations should be self-explanatory. Start date for the activity In day-month-year format. Duration of the task (in months) Self-explanatory. Person*month The amount in full months equivalent to the total work of an investigator during the course of the project. To calculate this, begin by estimating the percentage of a full-time week of professional work that the investigator will dedicate to project-related tasks in each phase of the project. Examples: 1 person at 50% for 6 months = 3 person*months 1 person at 30% for 6 months = 1.8 person*months 1 person at 50% for 15 days = 0.25 person*months The total number of person*months in the project for an investigator is obtained by adding up the amounts obtained for all of the phases of dedication to the project that need to be considered. 16

18 Description of task and expected results (4,000 characters max.) In connection with the content of subsection Research Plan and Methods, describe, in detail, for each task: the objectives, in the context of the project; the methods and approaches proposed to achieve them; the expected results of the task, and how these results are prerequisites for the tasks to follow; how they articulate with the other tasks; the role each partner and institution will play in the task. Justification of the resources, both human and material, needed to achieve the expected results of the task should be included. You will be asked for an overall justification of the resources required for the project in Section 8 - Justification of the budget. Members of the research team who will participate in the task After saving the contents of the previous fields, the members of the research team who will participate in the task should be entered. To do this, click on the task name to access the menu Members of the research team participating in the task. The first time you access this menu, only the name of the PI will appear. With the add button, you can link other members of the team to the task. These should be chosen from among the members indicated in Section 4 - Research team for the project. You will therefore have to first fill out the fields in Section 4 Research team, as well as the Justification of Human Resources section if you intend to contract personnel or award individual grants from project funds. PROJECT SCHEDULE AND MANAGEMENT The PI should indicate a timeline and describe the management structure to be adopted in the project, in particular with respect to coordination between participants, any meetings to be held and the reporting structure. A list of milestones should also be indicated. Description of the management structure (3,000 characters max.) In this section you should describe the management structure to be adopted, in particular the coordination among partners, the planned meetings, and the reporting process. The relevance of this item will depend on the dimension of the project, in particular, the number of participating research units. List of milestones A milestone or marker is a date by which a certain objective should be achieved or a phase should be completed. Enter a scheduled list of milestones that will allow independent evaluators to verify whether or not the project work is progressing towards the objective stated in the proposal. For each milestone, include a name (60 characters max.), a date and a description (300 characters max.) of what can be demonstrated or reported by that date. Milestone dates should be entered in the timeline graph described below. Example: Milestone M1 Date: Month 8 Name: Preparation of a test or questionnaire Description: Validation of the measuring tool Milestone M2 Date: Month 19 17

19 Name: Automatic counting system Description: system that automatically counts the number of parts in the transporter and marks those that have manufacturing defects by analyzing data from infrared sensors. The milestones should be mentioned in the progress reports to be submitted on the FCT website. The maximum number of Milestones is 6. Timeline Include a chart showing the schedule of tasks and milestone dates. You can use suitable software tools to generate this or adapt an Excel spreadsheet as shown in the example available, which is available for downloading in Section 3.4.2c of the application form. Generate a file in pdf format with the name timeline.pdf and upload it into Section 9 - Appendices. A sample timeline is shown below: When filling the timeline, - in the field Partner responsible for task you should include the acronym of the institution responsible for the task; - in the field Acronyms of partners involved in task you should mention the acronyms of all the institutions that will participate in the task, including the one responsible for it. We recommend that you fill out and validate the tasks on the application form before creating this additional file. That way any incongruence in the dates of the project and its tasks will be detected. 18

20 References Include the references cited in the technical and scientific description of the proposal, using a method of cross-referencing chosen by the PI. Include the title, authors names in the order they appear in the publication, name of the book or periodical, publisher's data when applicable, volume number, page numbers and year of publication. If a publication is available online, you may include the respective URL even though it is not mandatory. The maximum number of entries in this field is 30. The items in the application form are: Reference Year URL Publication Example: For the publication Silva, N., Costa, R., Elgart, R.A., Murt, C. (2007) High speed and robust controller for a non-linear system. Journal of Control Theory 57, you could use Reference: [SiCoElMu07] Year: 2007 URL: Publication: Silva, N., Costa, R., Elgart, R.A., Murt, C. (2007) High speed and robust controller for a non-linear system. Journal of Control Theory 57, and, in the proposal, the cross reference will be used, for example, as: The controller proposed in [SiCoElMu07] has recently been. There are situations (e.g., whenever an author yields to a publishing company the rights of a publication) where it is not possible to make the publication available on-line without violating the law. In these cases we suggest that you use the web server of your school or research unit to create an area of restricted access through username and password. If you consider this solution, create a document authentication.pdf file to be include in Section 9. with this information. The members of the evaluation panel will receive instructions to use its contents to access the restricted area and not divulge the material beyond what is strictly needed for this evaluation. Previous Publications Under the heading "Previous Publications", you may include references for up to 5 articles, books or monographs published or accepted for publication, authored or co-authored by members of the research team, which you consider relevant for evaluating the scientific quality of the demonstrated by the team for the project in question. Include the title, authors names in the order they appear in the publication, name of the book or periodical, publisher's data when applicable, volume number, page numbers and year of publication. It is highly recommended that the evaluators can access these 5 publications. These articles may be uploaded to a website. The URL addresses provided must be complete, and it is the PI s responsibility to make sure that the links remain active. until the evaluation process is completed; until the project is completed in the case of projects that are approved. 19

21 The fields to fill in the application form are the same as mentioned previously in References. There are situations (e.g., whenever an author yields to a publishing company the rights of a publication) where it is not possible to make the publication available on-line without violating the law. In these cases we suggest that you use the web server of your school or research unit to create an area of restricted access through username and password. If you consider this solution, create a document authentication.pdf file to be include in Section 9. with this information. The members of the evaluation panel will receive instructions to use its contents to access the restricted area and not divulge the material beyond what is strictly needed for this evaluation. This indication does not apply to the references in the field References. Re-submissions of applications It must be indicated if the present proposal is the re-submission of an application previously submitted by the same PI to FCT and not recommended for funding, indicating the reference of the application (applications submitted to FCT from the year 2006 inclusive). Additionally you must complete a field with a comment to the panel evaluation that evaluated the application, as well as summary identifying, in a clear and unambiguous way, the main changes introduced in the new proposal. Substantive arguments should be used to objectively direct to the scientific arguments used by the evaluators. Avoid a direct response to the evaluator that, almost certainly, will not be the same who evaluated the previous application. Research Team 4.1. List of members The information on the Principal Investigator (Name, Position and Academic Degree) will be automatically filled in. This is the information that the PI entered in his/her curriculum vitæ on the site The percentage of full time dedicated to the project should be filled in on the application form. You can access this field by clicking on the link associated with the PI s name. Read the Regulations and the Announcement of Call for Proposals carefully for the requirements regarding minimum allocation amounts for PIs. Each research team member to include (except for individual grant recipients or other personnel contracted specifically for the project) is required to supply his/her FCT association key (and no other FCT supplied credentials) to the Principal Investigator as a means of confirming the intent to participate in the project. Association keys are issued after completing the registration process in the FCT Management area in and can be consulted there. Notice that it shall also be indicated a percentage of dedication to the project compatible with the overall maximum of 100% at the time the acceptance agreement is signed. The FCTSIG management area also offers the means for each researcher to easily check all current and planned percentages of dedication in FCT projects. The names of all members of the team entered in the FCTSIG management area should be written just as they appear on the individual s national identity card or passport, and these should be updated whenever there are changes. 20

22 Investigators may choose to include DeGois curricula instead of FCTSIG/cv. In this case, they shall communicate to the PI their DeGois key (a number with 16 digits which is also part of the URL of your public curriculum DeGois). It is the responsibility of each team member, as well as being in his/her best interest, to update his/her curriculum vitæ at or since the existing information on that site on the date the proposal is sealed is what will be available to the evaluation panel. The curriculum vitæ: Should be brief, emphasizing relevant information, and should be written in English; Fill in the field Name in Publications; Should not include references to articles submitted for publication or presentation, nor to R&D projects currently in the proposal phase. Only articles published or accepted for publication and projects approved for funding should be mentioned; Should follow reverse chronological order when presenting lists; When mentioning projects, indicate the project title, the entity funding the project, the period in which the project was executed and your role in the project (e.g., Principal Investigator, team member); In the field Other skills/activities under "Current research interests, mention activities such as serving as associate editor for journals, member of the technical committee for international conferences, person in charge or jointly in charge of organizing scientific events; In the field Experience as advisor, mention only doctoral or master s theses that have already been completed. For each student, enter their name, title of the dissertation, year completed and the student s current job position. List doctoral dissertations first, followed by master s dissertations. Do not include dissertations currently underway; The field Field of Specialization under "Current research interests must be filled out. Important notes: The previous notes have been prepared from the standpoint of a curriculum in FCTSIG/cv. They are valid for what is relevant to a curriculum DeGois. The evaluation panel will examine with particular interest the CVs of the PI and key members of the research team (up to two) chosen by the PI. This choice is made in Section 4 - Research Team. All members of the research team, but particularly the PI and key members indicated by the PI, should pay particular attention to the directions given above for completing the CV in the FCTSIG (Information Management System). The curricula vitæ of all members of the research team will be copied at the moment the proposal is sealed to the evaluation area. Therefore, for the purposes of evaluation of the proposal, the state of each curriculum vitæ at the moment the proposal is sealed is what counts, although each researcher can continue to update his/her curriculum vitæ on the management page. 21